SamanthaEvans

Watching my shaggy brown standard poodle run and jump into the ocean, swim out, find the stick I threw, and bring it back in triumph, so proud of herself and so eager to do it again. And again. And again!

Thank you, everyone. I really never expected so many replies, yet here they are, not to mention the private messages. I'm grateful for your care and attention. It seems that we've been going through a hard time on the board, here, for the last couple of weeks. I'm sorry about that. Conflict is unpleasant. But I take heart in knowing that, much as we may get annoyed or upset with one another at times, the men and women here are good people navigating a way through a shadowy world that only we understand. Our conversations sometimes become intense because our demi-monde matters so much to us and we all want to feel respected, valued and accepted even when we don't agree. I say this because, as I tried to point out, above, the death of a client is something that only we understand. I'm not grief-stricken. L's death doesn't threaten or frighten me and I had no vested interest in his life despite the fact that he was a very regular client. I liked him. I enjoyed his company. I know he enjoyed mine. With most clients, when we part company, I never expect to see them again. I need to feel that our interaction is complete. If it happens again, it's a gift. But there are a few whom I've seen so often that this kind of firm separation seems absurd to me, after awhile. I will miss L. Life is always shorter than we think, friends. Take nothing for granted.

I hadn't realized this, fortunateone. Average turnaround time for most publishers is about a year; most schedule books for their fall and spring lists well ahead of time. They do fast-track some books, and that may have been the case with this one, but it doesn't happen all that often. Publishing is very expensive with few guarantees. Of course it's possible--it's actually quite likely--that the book was ghostwritten by someone else, in which case publishing quickly would have been easier.

Giving a new toy to my dog and watching her play with it like a little child, with such enthusiasm and joy. Listening to one of the cats purring just because he's happy. The skunk who patrols our garden every night. He's really big, with abundant, thick fur and a magnificent tail. A bumblebee landed on my hand when I was in the park yesterday. It just walked around for a little bit, calmly unafraid, then flew away again. Being brought fresh coffee in bed in the morning. My 87 year-old friend who has lived in her house, which her father built, since she was 17, has a wonderful garden, cooks great food, and never says an unkind thing about anyone. The seawall that goes all the way from Stanley Park around English Bay and False Creek before becoming a pathway in Kitsilano. Fireworks. Snow on the coast mountains in July!

Thank you for re-posting this, WIT. It's very helpful and worth reading again. I do not understand why the prohibitionists want new laws against procuring and trafficking when we already have good laws on the books. They never say anything about the laws as they are at the moment. One might think that their real beef is with law enforcement bodies and the courts for not exercising due diligence. Unless, of course, their real concern is to try to close down the sex trade simply because they think it's morally wrong for consenting adults, acting in private, to exchange sex for money. Additional Comments: This is where we must disagree. I cannot accept that the assault, murder and disappearance of street workers, or the risks that inside workers also face, is a reasonable compromise in order to avoid making the whole industry illegal. Decriminalizing prostitution will mean that when a sex worker is threatened, assaulted, robbed or worse, she can report it to the police and has every right to expect them to take action just as they would for anyone else. Right now, violent predators and abusers know that most prostitutes either won't report them to the police or will not have any credibility with the police if they try. Moreover, telling the police that one is a prostitute feels like a very risky step to take. But when predators know that the authorities are likely to believe their potential victims, many will find something else to do. With all due respect, SA, we always come back to the issue of outcalls because you take considerable pains to explain how and why you only engage in what you consider to be the legal aspects of the sex trade. I simply wanted to point out that most of the people associated with the women whom you see engage in criminal activity when they book your companions and deliver them to your home.

SA, I never thought that you would take a public stance in favour of decriminalizing prostitution. You've been clear about liking things the way they are even though you know that the current laws put women in enormous danger and make street workers easy prey for the likes of Robert Picton. I don't know what you think of him or the women he killed, but it is no longer possible to consider that the stories of missing and murdered women are exaggerations or fabrications. Picton is reported telling a stoolpigeon in his jail cell that he'd killed 49 women, and wanted to make it 50 before he retired from his work. He had every reason to think he would succeed, too, since the Vancouver City Police didn't t consider aboriginal prostitutes to be a priority. It is troubling to me that anyone should imagine that by only engaging paid companions in outcalls, and thereby staying within the narrow limits of the law, no one connected with those outcalls is working illegally. If men who seek outcalls use escort agencies, they know they're dealing with a pimp or a madam--people who are living off the avails of prostitution. Agencies are very good at matching up clients' sexual interests with the things their girls are or are not willing to do while quoting prices for the services the client wants. True, telephone conversations are considered private communication and so the agencies aren't subject to prosecution, but everyone knows this is a smokescreen. If the SP is driven to her meeting by someone else, that driver is also living off the avails, because he's working for the agency, even if the SP is, technically, working legally. The courts have long been clear about this: prostitutes are not entitled to use drivers or bodyguards; if they do, those staff are living on the avails. It's true that it's not difficult to get around this since agency outcalls are arranged privately and no one really pays much attention as long as everything is done quietly, without disturbing the neighbours. But, again, it's a smokescreen. My point is not to split legal hairs or quibble about details, however. What I'm trying to say is that thoughtful people recognize that it is impossible for a woman to work as a prostitute legally if she involves anyone else in her work. But if she doesn't--if she sets up her calls, herself, and drives herself to meet the client at his hotel or home--she puts herself at enormous risk, with no back-up immediately available to her if she needs it. Tania will make her tour and she will consistently exaggerate any numbers she refers to. I, for one, have no problem imagining that, over the course of her career as a madam, she may well have worked with 500 women. Most women don't stay in the sex trade for more than a few months, if that. High turnover at agencies is believable to me, particularly if the agency knowingly accepts women with addictions, as she claims to have done. In fact, she claims that all of the women who worked for her were addicts. I find that very hard to believe, but I'm sure she can't prove it and I know that I can't, either. I do know that the best agencies in Vancouver haven't worked this way in eons and they won't take on just any pretty woman who applies to be on their list. Everyone should question the stories of thousands of women in every large city who are the victims of coercive pimps or who have been forced to work in virtual or actual slavery in the sex trade. It's not that this doesn't happen. It does. But it's not the norm. Almost 90% of sex workers in Canada work indoors. While there are more prostitutes in every city than most people would ever imagine, anyone can see that our streets are not clogged with women plying their trade. I invite you to go out some evening around 9:00 p.m. and drive through the area where your city's street workers are. Count them. Recognize that you won't be able to see all of them--some will be working in a nearby alley or car or a cheap hotel and some work during the daytime but not at night. Others may work much later than 9:00. Some work in the very wee hours of the morning. My own estimate, as someone who spends a lot of time in the Downtown Eastside where I do volunteer work with a poverty agency, is that the number of street workers in this city may be only 3-5%. But more than 500 have gone missing or been found murdered in the last 40 years. Decriminalization will not increase human trafficking or sexual slavery. We can look at the experiences of places like Australia and New Zealand, neither of which report any increase in trafficking for sex work. They do note that there are many migrant workers who go to their countries because they choose to participate in the legal sex trade. Migrants make choices; they are not "trafficked." As for coercing women into the sex trade in these countries, it doesn't work. Men have no need to resort to illegally obtaining something that they can get legally and safely. At the end of the day, though, Tania and her friends want to bring a halt to the sex trade. Tania has made millions of dollars in this industry in the past and she's still expecting to make money from it today by exploiting her stories of the women she claims worked for her; by exploiting the social stigma attached to prostitution that prevents many of us in this industry from being able to speak out and challenge her in person, in public; and by exploiting the naiveté of her readers--by those who buy her book. She will earn royalties of about 10-12% on the sales, by the way. No one here agrees with trafficking women into prostitution. None of the paid companions on this board or anywhere else will say that women should be forced to do this work, against their will. None of us will encourage children to be exploited sexually, either. I daresay that we all want not just good laws against trafficking, coercion and exploitation, but also diligent, vigorous enforcement of those laws. And we want to be able to work safely. Tania found Jesus. She says that's why she "turned her life around." I like Jesus, too. Nothing he's reported to have said or done has anything to do with prostitutes. Prostitution isn't even condemned in the Bible, though it is frowned-upon. Slavery is accepted as a given, however, and slave owners are admonished to treat their slaves well. If Tania's new-found religion has helped her find peace, I'm happy for her. However, I believe that Jesus was all about compassion, and I find that quality to be somewhat limited in Tania's analysis. She has compassion for women who don't want to be in the sex trade, but she has none for those of us who do. I, for one, can't understand why Tania's religious epiphany should mean that I should not be able to make a living, doing what I choose to do, providing a valuable service to those who seek me out and who I'm willing to meet with. <end of long posts for awhile!>

Oh, God... Goldfinger, what have you done? This is how dreadful things get started! :icon_lol:

SA, you and I don't agree about a number of things, as we've seen in other threads, but we deal with each other pretty well, nevertheless. And so, in that spirit, I challenge you to come out, in public, along with the sex workers who are able to take a public position. Workers can, indeed, make effective statements about why they're in the sex trade; that they weren't brainwashed or trafficked into it; that they are, as you say, normal, ordinary women; that they're not drug addicts or slaves; that they don't rely on pimps, but they do want to be able to employ driver and bodyguards, as necessary; and that they want to have the freedom to live with whomever they choose without concern that those others may be charged with living on the avails of prostitution and being found in a bawdy house. Men can--and should--come out, too. Prohibitionists such as Tania make a lot of hay in their endless statements that the men who engage prostitutes are violent, degrading, abusive and dangerous. They portray men as seeking out sex workers because they believe that it's okay to abuse, injure and murder us. Occasionally, they'll allow that some men are not violent, they're just desperate; can't get a date any other way; have gross physical limitations, disabilities or deformities that most women can't cope with; and that the last thing any of them is interested in is "normal" sex. None of these stereotypes is true, of course. It would make an enormous difference if men who enjoy spending time with paid companions would simply come out, in public, and say so. They can demonstrate by their very presence and openness that they are not what the prohibitionists and fear-mongers say they are. SA, you go to great lengths to ensure that you see companions only within the limits of the laws as they are now. Since what you do is completely legal, you have nothing to be ashamed of. I challenge you to stand up and be counted.

I agree with fortunateone: Tania was the kind of sex worker who gives most of us a very bad name. And it's not an accident that she has a book out that she wants to promote. I also find it telling that she believes that nearly all of the women she pimped out were drug addicts. I don't believe it, to begin with, but if it's true, it says more about her and what she was willing to do to make money for her own purposes than it does about anything else. I also take offense against her sob-story about being a poor woman who was battling for the custody of her children, all the way to the SCC, but who says she managed, on the way, to become a wealthy entrepreneur and madam, managing the work and skimming off the incomes of up to 500 women. I came into this business because I was battling for the custody of my children, too. Sex work made it possible to pay the bills and look after my kids. If I'd had the skills, the insights and above all the time to become a high-flying madam, well, I sure wouldn't be biting the hands of those who made it possible for me to do what I needed to do to care for my children. That she says that she found Jesus and has repented of her old life also doesn't wash with me. She's still caught up in the sex trade, but from a different angle. And I don't think that Jesus aimed to make a lot of women unemployed and unemployable, either. He was more likely to have dinner with them and a lot of other social outcasts, like tax collectors and political insurgents. Having ended that little rant, I want to point out that there are things we can do. We can attend these meetings and ask questions. We can also write letters to the editors of our local papers, websites, radio stations, etc., and raise a few points. Canada already has laws against human trafficking. What's wrong with them? Why do we need new laws? How many victims of human trafficking is she talking about? Where does she get her data? The simple fact is that there is no straightforward way to count migrant and/or trafficked workers, anywhere. They don't report in to some agency or register with employment services organizations. How does she distinguish between trafficked labour and migrant labour? What concern can she demonstrate for people who are forced to travel to other countries, against their will, to work as farm labourers, construction labourers and domestic labourers? Is she really supporting those who are trying to prevent immigration of all kinds, or who are migrant workers who come to North America to work as undocumented labourers? Prohibitionists frequently see all women migrants as sexually vulnerable above all other considerations (such as needing to earn money to support family members in their countries of origin). They lump women and children together as though women were children with no agency or decision-making authority. They characterize women as incapable of initiating migration or as incapable of making a free choice to do sex work rather than the kinds of menial, underpaid jobs ordinarily available to undocumented, illegal immigrants. Is she branding all women who migrate to Canada as trafficked prostitutes? Some migrants come here and decide to work in the sex trade instead of other kinds of work. Is she opposed to their migration, or just prostitution? Many women resist being "rescued" from prostitution. How does she account for this? If her concern is for women who engage in street prostitution, how does she account for the preponderance of substance addiction and mental illness found among SWs? What steps is she taking to campaign against the illicit drug trade? In what ways does she advocate for everyone's immediate access to mental health services? In what ways is she pressuring local, provincial and federal governments and law enforcement agencies to uphold the laws we already have against trafficking and pimping? How does she hope to increase the number of charges and convictions for these crimes? What plans does she suggest for the women whom she is attempting to put out of work? How will she ensure that they are able to earn a liveable income, live in safe conditions and retain custody of their children?

:bigclap:Brava! I agree. I, too, am dismayed by how often disagreements degenerate to this kind of mindless, thoughtless, derogatory attack. It serves no purpose. It tells no truth. Sure, Rob Ford is overweight. But his policies don't have any direct correlation to his weight. They're just, in my rarely-humble opinion, misguided, at best. These put-downs always say a lot more about the person who utters them than they do about the one to whom they're directed. They show a lack of imagination, an inability to engage in responsible, respectful debate, and an insensitivity for others on the sidelines who may be affected. Mostly, I think, they show a chilling degree of self-hatred. Just $0.02 from an uppity old whore! :icon_lol:

I'm a member of the -ERB boards that start with P and T, in addition to this one. I may have posted 6-10 times on the others, maybe less. For awhile, I advertised on one of them and I may again, but not because I enjoy the conversation or reading the vile things that are written there. I'm a businesswoman and it's my experience that some very fine gentlemen do take the time to weed through the nonsense to find the woman who's right for them and then they often spend a considerable amount of money on her. I'm willing to be discovered by such men. See, that's where I start. I didn't decide to be a paid companion because I have a tender heart. I got into this business because I needed the income. I know who I am and what I have to offer; I know that there are very, very few others like me in this business; I have a reasonable grasp of economic theory. So, I took a risk and things have worked out very well. The sex trade is built upon the objectification of women. There's no question about that. However, I'm old enough and I've been around long enough that I can say that the "best <insert body part>" threads seem a bit trite to me, but I'm not offended by them. Men like to look at all kinds of women, all the time. It's how their minds are wired. I appreciate gorgeous young women who seem to spend all their waking hours at the gym, too. Moreover, I think I understand something about the fantasy that drives those "best of" threads and I know that it's got nothing to do with me, or the women in the photos. Not at all. Most men don't come within a country mile of looking like Adonis, or David, or George Clooney. Personally, I find something bittersweet about middle-aged men mooning over young models and stunningly beautiful-looking escorts, wanting them, wanting to feel the way they hope they would feel if they were with those girls, or the way they think they might have felt and looked, themselves, when they were her age. I have an inkling that one of the down-sides of spending time with those photos is that a man has to feel a kind of dull sadness at some level, at least once in a while. Because, even if he can get that woman to see him, even if he can touch her and have sex with her, he can't have her. Not because there's anything wrong with her, or even that there's anything wrong with him, but because even he really wants something much more complex, engaging and enthralling than simple beauty, perfect breasts or a firm, round backside. What he really, really wants isn't what she's selling and he can't buy it, anywhere. That unattainable factor can be frustrating for some men, it's true. A very few become angry, embittered, misogynistic because they feel they're entitled to have what they've seen, especially if they can pay for it. But the grand majority of men aren't like this at all. They do distinguish between fantasy and reality. They know that a paid companion is a real woman with thoughts, needs, concerns and an imagination and a spirit of her own. Men want to have some fun, relax a bit, forget about the rest of the world for an hour or two. Most don't want to hurt anyone, including the companion. Most do their best to treat us well. This is my experience, at least. As for the threads that ask whether companions prefer this activity or that one, or whether they do this thing or another one, they don't bother me at all. I don't reply to them too often, but I do sometimes, because I've learned that as much as men like to portray themselves as knowledgeable and highly experienced, the simple fact is that most are not, no matter how many women they've been with. Most are much more shy than they'll admit. They hope that doing this, touching here, nuzzling there, trying to be gentle when it's the time for that, and trying to be more controlling when it's time for that too, everything will be okay. The fact is that they don't know whether this or that touch feels the way they want it to, or how to go about discussing the one special thing they hope they might be able to do. And I know that when someone starts a thread about "digits," even though most of the men will say, in sober, serious tones, that they always wash their hands thoroughly, they always make sure their nails are neatly trimmed and filed, they always make sure to move smoothly and slowly with lots of lube.... they're not really telling the truth. All that matters is that they've gotten the message: there are some things they need to keep in mind that maybe they hadn't thought about. I think this is one of the great things about CERB. Our society isn't half as liberated as it likes to imagine. Men and women don't talk about sex very often or very well. Asking questions takes a lot of nerve. No one wants to seem ignorant or inept, but none of us learned a damn thing about love-making in high school sex ed classes. How bodies feel, what feels good, what can feel good under certain circumstances, what might be wonderful in other circumstances--where did we learn that? Heck, from my high school sex ed classes, all I learned was that menstruation was a manageable hassle, pregnancy was a huge issue and that there were some nasty "venereal diseases" out there. No one ever mentioned orgasms, let alone masturbation (solo or mutual), hand-jobs or blow jobs. I learned about those things, clumsily, in various parked cars with others who didn't know any more than I did. But men can come here and ask questions about what women like and how to do it, or why some are reluctant to do some things but will do others. Where else can they go to get this kind of information? Not at home! If a couple doesn't have frank, open, gentle and loving conversations about their bodies, how they work and what each person likes and doesn't like--if they don't have those conversations in the early months of their relationship, they will never have them at all, no matter how many decades they're together. So, as far as I'm concerned, go ahead, ask. Use whatever words you're comfortable with. I know what you mean, even if I don't like the word. That word isn't about me, anyway. Ask about anal sex. Ask about what we like in DATY. Ask about how we like to have our breasts touched, how to kiss us, how to do anything and everything you're interested in doing. Notice that six of us will give at least eight different responses. Notice too, that, as far as I can remember, none of us will say that you're a fool for asking, or that you have no right to know. If you ask me, I will feel honoured by your vulnerability and trust. I don't think many women enjoy the idea that men just want to get together in some locker room and compare notes about who had whom and how good she was or wasn't, whether she looked as good naked as she did dressed, how far she let them get with her and what they think someone else could try with her next time. We don't like that. But I don't see a lot of that, here. It happens, to some degree, in the recommendations and in the threads about how to push the boundaries in the strip club or whether the massage artists will go farther than advertised. I think that the writers of those threads speak for themselves. Everyone is advertising here, all the time. I'm as likely to be over-sensitive as anyone else is, at times. Some days, I don't like reading the boards. Other days, I find things here that make me want to cry because they're so real, so open, so vulnerable and true. Some days I'm patient. Other days, I'm a cranky bitch. Turning off the computer on bad days and taking the dog to run along the beach can be the best thing.

Congratulations! I always find your posts to be helpful, thoughtful, interesting and/or amusing--well worth reading. Your contributions go a long way toward making this board a good place. Keep writing!

Phaedrus is thoughtful and helpful in addition to being a nice guy. There are lots of reasons to like him!

Lace curtains and a light, gentle breeze A hurricane lamp and a box of matches Strawberries and champagne Blueberry muffins and Earl Grey tea A toothy piece of paper and a conté crayon A sleeping man on rumpled sheets (goes with the paper and crayon!)

Cloud computing is very tempting. The speed alone is wonderful. I do a lot in the cloud, now, but I'm wary of it, too. Privacy issues abound and I don't trust "them" to keep my documents and personal info as safe as I think it should be.

I can't see why there would be a problem with asking, politely, why the companion doesn't allow digits. Would she be okay with it if you wore a glove? She might. I sometimes allow it, and sometimes I don't. A lot depends on the mood and chemistry between us. I always ask clients to wash their hands on their way into the bedroom. Some hesitate, but then understand. The one guy who hesitated, then went into the bathroom and did a very quick, pretend wash:icon_wink: only got a hand job from me that day. He asked why and I said that since he wasn't willing to take a couple of minutes to wash his hands properly, I wasn't willing to take any risks with him, even with the condom. He wasn't too happy, but he did try to re-schedule with me. I declined.

There's a lot of helpful information in this thread, and I'm grateful to those who've taken the time to post it. Emma, it goes without saying that I'm sorry you've had to deal with this. At the same time, we can always count on you to do the right thing and to let us know about it, so thank you for that! The sad fact is that money is often laundered through casinos and paid companions. Drug dealers may be a source of counterfeit money, or may also circulate it, usually unknowingly. Most people don't carry much cash these days and they rarely pay in cash for purchases over about $50. I have a client who's a cop (and that was a surprise, believe me! He's actually one of my best guys.) He advised me some time ago to be very careful about the amount of cash I keep on hand and told me not to store cash in a safe deposit box linked to any bank account with my name on it. In the highly unlikely event that I should ever be charged with running a bawdy house, all of my goods would be seized and my bank accounts frozen. If I have a safety deposit box in my name, the contents of that will be frozen too. Any cash found in my premises or in a safety deposit box would be forfeited, whether I am eventually convicted of running a bawdy house or not, because it would be deemed to be the "proceeds of crime." My personal goods--the contents of my home--would only be released to me if I am found not guilty. Otherwise, they would be retained and sold because they, too, would be assumed to be the proceeds of crime. This is all very unlikely, but obviously is not outside the bounds of possibility.

Street prostitution is illegal and CERB's policies prohibit publicizing anything s illegal activities except for companions who do incalls. CERB and law enforcement authorities in general recognize that incall operations are much safer for women, which is why it's rare for a companion to be prosecuted if she's working quietly, causing no disturbances and attracting no attention to herself.

Thank you for those links, SA. One is for an Iranian news site, another is for an anti-decriminalization blog, and the third is for an article in Maclean's magazine that notes that "some" estimate the amount of prostitution in Sweden plummeted 90%, though it gives no sources. I reckon that if the Swedish government says both that it has no idea how many street prostitutes there were, or are, and that it also believes street prostitution dropped by 30-50%, higher estimates have even less validity since the Swedish government considers a 30-50% drop to be a sign of success for their laws. Whether there will be new legislation and what such legislation may contain is, at this point, conjecture. I do notice that Libby Davies, NDP MP for Vancouver East and deputy Opposition leader, is in favour of decriminalizing prostitution. Her riding includes Vancouver's Downtown Eastside. What she has to say is indicative of the position the Opposition would take on legislative changes. Public debate is helpful, but when the issue is full of stigma, it's difficult to have an open debate. I, for one, will write about issues related to prostitution, but because I have children who would be unfairly affected, I don't feel it would be responsible of me to speak out in public about prostitution and my views based on my experience as a paid companion. Many other companions are in similar situations. I'm grateful to those who are more free to take a public stance. It would be wonderful if the police, lawyers, judges and Members of Parliament who are our clients would speak out about their experiences and support decriminalization, but I am under no illusions that this will happen before the anticipated freezing-over of Hell. Even "ordinary" men are not likely to make clear public statements supporting prostitutes' rights and safety. One of the bitter aspects of the debate is that so much depends on self-interest. While we are all concerned about women in the sex trade, safety is a genuine day-to-day issue for all sex workers--whether working indoors or outside. For our clients, unfortunately, our safety is generally less important than their desire not to be stigmatized as customers of prostitutes. Enormous integrity and strength of character are required of those who publicly advocate change that flies in the face of conventional morality. Sadly, too few will attempt to pass the character test.

There are also women who work in the porn industry but who do not also work as service providers.

The street trade is the only area of the industry that's likely to be affected immediately and, judging by experiences elsewhere, even street sex work will not be fully curtailed or eliminated. In Sweden, there was an initial 40% reduction in street prostitution, but that only lasted a couple of years. Reports are that there are as many street sex workers plying their trade now as there were originally. This is probably because the penalties men face if caught are insignificant. In Canada, the great majority of street sex workers are aboriginal women who are addicted to street drugs and/or are mentally ill. LE doesn't take these women seriously, already, as the Picton murders demonstrated. Moreover, I know from my connections with the downtown east side, here, that the police are already over-extended when dealing with violence, drunkenness and mentally ill people in that neighbourhood. No one I've spoken with in any of the neighbourhood agencies thinks that the police will have any increased motivation for arresting street prostitutes. Social service agencies here are more concerned about what happens when no one knows where the women are. After all, these women are not just working for the money. Many of them prefer to be paid in drugs rather than in cash. LE does little to nothing about the drug trade in the neighbourhood. The drug trade is an essential aspect of the Vancouver economy to such a great extent that it is unimaginable that any genuine action will be taken to get rid of it in the near future. Attempting to get rid of street prostitutes just puts those women under the care of the drug dealers, many of whom already act as pimps. I agree, absolutely! I no longer think that there is any real, legitimate concern about safety and harm reduction. None at all. The federal government takes the position that they have no obligation to look after the safety of women engaged in street prostitution. The harm they face is the price they pay for being on the streets to begin with. Right now, we should really avoid fear-mongering. There is no point in raising anxiety. The federal government is not going to enact legislation while the matter is before the courts. That the Ontario Court of Appeal decision will be heard by the Supreme Court of Canada is a fait accompli. The government will be content to wait for the SCC to make rulings. In the meantime, regardless of what the Himel appeal decides, we can expect the current laws to stay on the books, as-is. I believe that all of the government chatter about changes in the laws means nothing. Even if the government does attempt to write new legislation and is successful in passing it into law, nothing really will change. I am convinced that it's only a smokescreen, or perhaps something that they will point to in future campaigns as an example of their focus on law and order. The government is not interested in prosecuting men for engaging in consensual sex, even if they pay women to be their consensual partners. The government is also not genuinely interested in doing anything that will make a positive change in the lives of women in the street sex trade. They don't consider those women to be constituents: they're aboriginal, they don't vote and they don't represent significantly large enough numbers to be important. Independent paid companions will not be subjected to police interference anymore than we are now. Most of us will carry on as before, increasing our screening requirements and perhaps raising our rates a bit, because we can; because the company of reputable, reliable companions is always a desirable commodity; and because slightly nervous but knowledgeable gentlemen appreciate having one less thing to be worried about and are willing to pay what it costs for that kind of peace of mind. What will happen to the agencies is less certain. In some places, we can expect some of them to close. In many cases, frankly, this would not be a bad thing. However, there are also some very good agencies across the country who may decide to close their doors for awhile, for the sake of expediency. So, for awhile, it may be more difficult to find a group of lovely women to provide care and comfort at bachelor parties, poker nights and Grey Cup parties. Is it a problem when someone has to do some work to find three or four women who are all available at the same time for the same event at the same fee, each? I don't think so!

Context is SO important! Reclaiming words like "slut" is a way for us to reduce their derogatory power, their power to intimidate, shame, abuse and isolate people to whom the word is applied. I hope that, eventually, "slut" will have no meaning or power for teenage girls, for example. Personally, I do not fit any conventional "slut" or "whore" stereotype. Honestly, some days I'm sure I would not look out of place pouring tea at the neighbourhood church's Strawberry Social. I dress conservatively. I behave well in public. I don't call attention to myself unless I decide I want to call attention to myself. This is a great cover. Dropping the cover at the right time can make a huge difference to the dynamics of an evening, however. For example, as the convivial dinner ends and we rise from the table, many times my evening's date has said something like, "Samantha, you are such a nice woman . . . ". He's earnest. He's a little dazzled, perhaps. He's not going to make any move that shatters the illusion. If I were unscrupulous, I could end the evening then and there and he would leave feeling that he had done the right thing, perhaps congratulating himself for not taking advantage of a real lady like me. But I am a principled companion and only linger over dinner with men I truly like. I notice that I can always get things back on track if I give my date a warm hug and murmur in his ear something like, "Yes, I am a nice woman. Just don't forget that I'm also a whore . . . ". :icon_cool:

Why does all of this prognostication somehow make me feel really . . . old?

For the benefit of all you rain-dancing folks, I would just like to remind you that Vancouver is in a rain forest, which is why it can rain at any time here, and frequently does. But our most rainy season is between October and March. Should any or all of you feel the urge to do the rain-dance here, I trust you'll remember how to find me.....

I like this thought-provoking essay, Erin. Thanks for sharing it! Years ago, when I was in grad school, I was walking across the parking lot early one morning when I came up to a friend whose posture seemed to be a bit tense, kind of stalwart, as though her back was hurting her or something. I asked how she was. She looked at me and shook her head for a moment and I had the impression that she was biting back her words. I waited. After a bit, she said, "I have some advice to share." I nodded to her. She continued, "Never pray for patience. If you do, God will surely try you!" She grinned a little grimly and we laughed together. I've often thought of that moment. Be careful what you ask for is wise advice!